Talk:Reductionism: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>John R. Brews
imported>Peter Jackson
Line 10: Line 10:


Perhaps the most interesting aspects of reduction show up in biology with the struggle to determine just what are the organizing principles: gene interaction, natural selection and a host of other nebulous issues appear to compete for dominance. There is an article in the Stanford Encyclopedia: [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reduction-biology/ Brigandt & Love]. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 19:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the most interesting aspects of reduction show up in biology with the struggle to determine just what are the organizing principles: gene interaction, natural selection and a host of other nebulous issues appear to compete for dominance. There is an article in the Stanford Encyclopedia: [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reduction-biology/ Brigandt & Love]. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 19:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
"for any [focal] level of phenomena there is a lower level that explains in a causal way the focal level." Sounds like what you might call infinite reductionism: turtles all the way down. Contrast reduction to, say, particle physics. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 14:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:23, 2 September 2013

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  The attempt to replace high-level explanations of phenomena by more basic explanations, often in terms of interacting subsystems or parts. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories:  Philosophy, Biology and Physics [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  American English

This is just a stub, importing material formerly in Scientific MethodGareth Leng 09:52, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Proposal for a wider scope for this article: anyone interested?

At the moment Reductionism is focused upon the idea of reductionism as an 'approach' to science, and particularly physics and chemistry. This view is too restrictive and doesn't deal with the really wide spectrum of this concept. The article in WP quotes John Polkinghorne: the belief "that a complex system is nothing but the sum of its parts." A related view is that "for any [focal] level of phenomena there is a lower level that explains in a causal way the focal level." These seem to me a better starting point. Is anyone interested in redrafting this article? John R. Brews 18:50, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Part of this revision could consider an antireductionist view that is exploited by crackpots, like that of Stuart Kaufman, who leans heavily upon emergence and wishes to reopen the door to a Creator. John R. Brews 18:55, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps the most interesting aspects of reduction show up in biology with the struggle to determine just what are the organizing principles: gene interaction, natural selection and a host of other nebulous issues appear to compete for dominance. There is an article in the Stanford Encyclopedia: Brigandt & Love. John R. Brews 19:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

"for any [focal] level of phenomena there is a lower level that explains in a causal way the focal level." Sounds like what you might call infinite reductionism: turtles all the way down. Contrast reduction to, say, particle physics. Peter Jackson 14:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Reductionism&oldid=159232"